The TRADE 63 - Q1 2020 | Page 78

[ A L G O R I T H M I C T R A D I N G production are likely. Simple and fast still matters Respondents’ reasons for using algos, presented in Figure 2 as a percentage of responses, differ between 2020 and 2019. Overall, increases are seen in six areas of algo trading this year versus last: ease of use, increased trader pro- ductivity, greater anonymity, smart order routing, routing logic, and pre- trade estimates. Meanwhile, decreases are observed in seven categories over the same period: consistency of execution performance, the reduction of market impact, algo monitoring, lower commission rates, better prices, higher speed, and customisation. Thus, net/net, there is a greater focus on working orders quickly, easily, and in a sophisticated manner that protects information leakage. There is less emphasis being placed on (implicitly/explicitly) cheaper algos, those that are faster than others, or those that can be highly customised to provide a consistent and superior outcome. "One and done" may be a relic of the past Across the board, it is evident that long-only funds of varying assets un- der management (AUM) are mostly looking to at least two algo providers (Figure 3). From a diversification and business-continuity perspective, managers are likely unwilling to place all of their eggs in one basket and risk a provider outage. The smallest firms, including those managing up to US$1 billion, appear to be comfortable with using roughly two providers. Larger firms, such as those with an AUM range of US$1 billion to US$10 billion, likely rely on three. The largest firms with AUM over US$10 billion work with about four algo providers. Digging into the details a bit, long-only managers with US$0.25 billion to US$0.5 billion in AUM show a year-over-year decrease in the 78 // TheTRADE // Spring 2020 S U R V E Y ] Figure 2: Reasons for using algos (% of respondents) Feature 2020 Ease-of-use 2019 11.08 2018 10.98 14.57 Consistency of execution performance 10.51 11.25 13.69 Increase trader productivity 10.45 10.05 11.29 Reduce market impact 10.29 10.98 11.93 Greater anonymity 9.93 7.64 9.18 Flexibility and sophistication of smart order routing 8.02 7.59 n/a Algo monitoring capabilities 7.20 7.64 n/a Lower commission rates 6.83 8.28 7.98 Better prices (price improvement) 6.65 7.13 7.78 Higher speed lower latency 6.56 6.81 7.90 Customisation capabilities 5.74 6.39 7.74 Data on venue/order routing logic or analysis 5.07 4.14 n/a Results match pre-trade estimates 1.67 1.12 3.27 number of algo providers, falling to 1.83 in 2020 from 2.20 in 2019, on av- erage. No doubt, cost pressures have kept them from opening up the purse strings to engage with additional providers. Likewise, larger managers with over US$50 billion in AUM have also scaled back and consolidated their relationships to an average of 4.02 providers this year from 4.45 in 2019. While having four providers still appears to be a well-diversified strategy, adding more (e.g., equity algo providers) may have diminishing returns in light of limited commission budgets to pay for research and other services. Larger managers are generally more likely to be motivated to use several algo providers, given the resourc- es they are able to put to work as well as the requirements necessary for managing a multi-asset class portfolio. Looking beyond equity algorithms, the rise of algo use in the foreign exchange (FX) asset class has grown over the years for spot trading and, recently, has begun to extend to FX derivatives such as non-deliv- erable forwards. New regulations, such as the uncleared margin rules, are driving FX derivatives into the Figure 3: Average number of providers used by AUM (USD billions) Feature Not answered 2020 2019 3.42 2018 2.33 2.87 Up to 0.25 2.14 2.13 2.50 0.25-0.5 1.83 2.20 2.17 0.5-1 2.00 1.43 2.50 1 to 10 3.33 2.90 3.64 10 to 50 4.25 3.73 4.26 More than 50 4.02 4.45 4.41